Re: Why should we assume LD_ASSUME_KERNEL during oracle product installation?
- From: Anand <shastry17@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: "Jared Still" <jkstill@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 19 May 2007 07:48:17 +0530
Hi Jared,
Yes you are right!!..you could have re-directed me to google if you
didnt want to give suggestions, Thanks for your valuable reply. But my
question in general is why in some case we assume LD_ASSUME_KERNEL.
are there any particular reason?.
I don't understand this sentence. It seems to imply that you don't think
LD_LIBRARY_PATH is necessary with 10g.
Yes I thought the same that 10g doesnot require any Kernel assumptions.
Correct me if iam wrong.
reg,
Anand
On 5/17/07, Jared Still <jkstill@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On 5/17/07, Anand <shastry17@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Hello all,
> Why should we assume LD_ASSUME_KERNEL with some value during oracle
> installation. Is that because the kernel versions are different for
> different operating system's and oracle works on specific Kernel
> version to enable glibc optimizations or are there any core reasons
> for this?. Please let me know on this.
Rather than cut and paste from Werner's informative website, I will direct
you to google for it. Googling for LD_ASSUME_KERNEL Oracle brought up
the answer in the first 2 hits.
> Also RHAS4 has 2.6 kernel, maybe that's the reason why the
> LD_ASSUME_KERNEL issue has disappeared.
No, Oracle 9 requires this with the 2.6 Kernel.
> The 10.2.0.1's oraenv script does still have LD_LIBRARY_PATH in it.
> Please give me your sugesstions.
I don't understand this sentence. It seems to imply that you don't think
LD_LIBRARY_PATH is necessary with 10g.
--
Jared Still
Certifiable Oracle DBA and Part Time Perl Evangelist
--
//www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l
Other related posts:
